Author Topic: Is Boris’s Lax Leadership Putting Us All in Danger ?  (Read 109528 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline faithlilly

Re: Is Boris’s Lax Leadership Putting Us All in Danger ?
« Reply #75 on: March 21, 2020, 01:17:50 AM »
It’s not a socialist solution, it’s the ONLY solution.  Criticising Johnson at a time when he is struggling to do the best for the country is not really helping.  Do you really think the government has done nothing right in the last week?  How about some credit where it’s due, or are you simply too churlish to do that?

Turn the tables...imagine Corbyn was PM and had been soundly criticised by over a hundred scientists for his actions....would you be so magnanimous then ?
Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”

Let’s count the months, shall we?

Offline faithlilly

Re: Is Boris’s Lax Leadership Putting Us All in Danger ?
« Reply #76 on: March 21, 2020, 01:21:03 AM »
So my employee will definitely better off than me now thanks to the latest government announcement

“There is mounting anger among the self employed over what they regard as insufficient support for them in the emergency measures announced this evening in the UK by chancellor Rishi Sunak.

The self employed will gain access to the equivalent of Statutory Sick Pay, and be given tax deferrals, but are not part of the 80% earnings pledge.
The Federation of Small Business said: “The question at this point is – with firms beingforcedto close – why have the self-employed been excluded from the commitment to pay 80% of earnings?

“It cannot be right that an employee currently earning £25,000 a year could access £20,000 per annum through the new job retention scheme, while someone who’s self-employed earning the same sum might only access around £5,000 worth of support.”

Phillipa Childs of the Bectu union, which covers thousands of freelancers in the entertainment and media industry, added: “The Chancellor’s support package for workers will come as a devastating blow to freelance and self-employed workers who needed much more support than they are being given.

“He must urgently revise his income support plan to include these workers and not force them onto the welfare system and we will be making urgent representations to government to make sure all our members are protected during this crisis.”

But Johnson’s doing his best !!!!  8)><(
Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”

Let’s count the months, shall we?

Offline Venturi Swirl

Re: Is Boris’s Lax Leadership Putting Us All in Danger ?
« Reply #77 on: March 21, 2020, 07:09:31 AM »
Turn the tables...imagine Corbyn was PM and had been soundly criticised by over a hundred scientists for his actions....would you be so magnanimous then ?
Yes.  You seem to have forgotten that I can’t stand Boris either.  Rishi though, now he’s a little star isn’t he?
"Surely the fact that their accounts were different reinforces their veracity rather than diminishes it? If they had colluded in protecting ........ surely all of their accounts would be the same?" - Faithlilly

Offline Venturi Swirl

Re: Is Boris’s Lax Leadership Putting Us All in Danger ?
« Reply #78 on: March 21, 2020, 07:09:49 AM »
But Johnson’s doing his best !!!!  8)><(
Child.
"Surely the fact that their accounts were different reinforces their veracity rather than diminishes it? If they had colluded in protecting ........ surely all of their accounts would be the same?" - Faithlilly

Offline Venturi Swirl

Re: Is Boris’s Lax Leadership Putting Us All in Danger ?
« Reply #79 on: March 21, 2020, 07:22:26 AM »
I love Matthew Parris, he so often puts into words what I am thinking

“Crashing the economy will also cost lives
Just like the virus, impoverishment kills, and locking down the elderly might have been a drastic but fairer solution

Matthew Parris
Saturday March 21 2020, 12.01am, The Times
Share




Save

From the start we’ve all agreed on one thing: we must follow the science. Viruses, we say, are blind to politics and the coronavirus emergency requires only one political choice: to listen to the experts. Our prime minister is hardly seen except flanked by two of these and the intended message is clear: there are no political choices here. “The science” will tell us what to do.

But when people tell you there is no place for politics in a decision, it is almost always the case that they have already made a political choice, often without knowing it. Boris Johnson has. He may well have made the right choice. God knows, when as prime minister you face the possibility that within a year we could lose more of our citizens than we lost during the Blitz, the pressure must be almost intolerable. He has decided to proceed, as have most world leaders, on the basis that it’s best to err on the side of caution and throw everything we have at this pandemic. Including our economy, as evidenced by the chancellor’s astonishing measures to try to mitigate the harm.

I cannot say he is wrong. What do I, what does he, what does anyone know? One writes with great hesitation on an issue like this. But there’s a lurking doubt in my mind that still seems worth thinking about, if only for when the next pandemic strikes, as it surely will.

World leaders have decided to prioritise the reduction of deaths among the old and very old at the expense of the livelihoods and prospects of those who are still at work. Even that is only a guess at this stage. It does seem that the elderly and those with underlying health conditions are overwhelmingly going to be the casualties but information is still coming in and it’s too early to be sure. But on that basis we’re weighing the nation’s jobs, businesses and the whole of the younger generation’s and working population’s prospects against an imperative to keep one smaller part of the population (to which, being 70 years old, I belong) alive. Must it be either/or?

If the aim is finally to corner and isolate the virus, and if we throw everything into the attempt, we shall almost certainly succeed but at enormous cost. What, though, if this is not the last time a virus mutates into a fast-spreading threat to life? Even after we beat this one, we won’t know whether Covid-19 is annihilated for good or just beaten into a temporary stand-off. So it’s worth attempting a dispassionate survey of the battle, to see what can be learnt for the next one.


Some things seem increasingly likely. That, for instance, Covid-19 is much better at spreading itself than the influenzas we’re familiar with; that it appears much, much more dangerous to the old or physically fragile than to the rest of the population; and that the fatality rate is much higher than from flu. Figures vary wildly between countries, however, and can be especially unreliable when they come from countries like ours where (to the bafflement of most of us) there has been little or no testing of the general population. The most reliable figure probably comes from South Korea and that figure so far is just short of 1 per cent.

The Korean rate may look small but could still mean about half a million of us British would die, far more than seasonal flu kills; and my guess is that this is the worst-case scenario ministers are contemplating. It would overwhelm our NHS, which explains this week’s U-turn on the previous policy of attenuating the spread rather than trying to stop it. Most of these deaths would probably occur among our oldest citizens plus some younger people already at risk.

Given what we already know, or surmise, might it be worth considering a more ruthlessly but more narrowly targeted drive to confine the most apparently at-risk (like me, I fear) for our own protection, rather than (as it seems) wreck the economy by confining almost everybody else? Are we going to do this all over again next time a mutant virus threatens the ever-increasing number of fragile elderly that modern medicine adds to our population? My mother is 93 and very frail. My father was kept alive for 15 years with heart operations and drugs. I wouldn’t wish to sacrifice a day of their lives but if we could design a way to keep grandparents safe without closing down the economy, then their many children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren would thank us and so, I think, would they.

“Epidemic” is an emotive word; “pandemic” even more so. A virus, especially a “foreign virus” roots easily in the public and political imagination as an identifiable enemy, an alien assassin. Fatality statistics look like brute and indisputable facts, especially when the figures for “would have died anyway before long” are beyond our grasp and sound so unfeeling. Contrast these all-too vivid and immediate spectres with cloudy abstractions like “the economic health” of a nation or the planet.

But economic distress is no less real for being stealthy. Impoverishment kills. Redundancy can be a physical or mental health disaster. Bankruptcy wounds. Debt scars. Austerity comes calling in its own hood, wields its own scythe. People die quietly, alone and unreported — through drink, drugs, unhealthy living, depression or despair. Read Sir Michael Marmot’s 2010 report, Fair Society, Healthy Lives, and you will see hard statistics about the links between poverty and reduced longevity — longevity which in the poorer parts of Britain is already dropping. And if this is true of a rich country with a well-resourced health service such as ours, what will a global recession do in places where provision is already thin and overstretched?

If you kick the global economy in the guts, you kick billions of real people in the guts too: it’s just that, unlike coronavirus victims, we’ll never know who they were. For good and honourable reasons our government is straining to protect the identifiable, but perhaps at the expense of the less identifiable. We can’t change course now, and nor am I even certain our present course is unwise, but let’s give some brutally honest thought to how we approach the next epidemic when it hits us. Is crashing the economy, every time, the only answer? If so, and given this pandemic is not the last, we’re in for a rollercoaster ride.“
"Surely the fact that their accounts were different reinforces their veracity rather than diminishes it? If they had colluded in protecting ........ surely all of their accounts would be the same?" - Faithlilly

Offline Wonderfulspam

Re: Is Boris’s Lax Leadership Putting Us All in Danger ?
« Reply #80 on: March 21, 2020, 08:50:42 AM »
"Given what we already know, or surmise, might it be worth considering a more ruthlessly but more narrowly targeted drive to confine the most apparently at-risk (like me, I fear) for our own protection, rather than (as it seems) wreck the economy by confining almost everybody else?"


This was precisely what I suggested last night, for which I received a 50% warning.

It's only the old & ill that are dying, so ship them all off somewhere, quarantine them all together & let the rest of us young healthy individuals go about life as normal.

Quite why that warranted a 50% warning I've no idea.

Perhaps the mod that issued the points might like to explain the reason, I won't hold my breath.
« Last Edit: March 21, 2020, 09:28:30 AM by Wonderfulspam »
I stand with Putin. Glory to Mother Putin.

Offline faithlilly

Re: Is Boris’s Lax Leadership Putting Us All in Danger ?
« Reply #81 on: March 21, 2020, 11:58:13 AM »
Yes.  You seem to have forgotten that I can’t stand Boris either.  Rishi though, now he’s a little star isn’t he?

The hedge fund speculator who helped bring about the 2008 recession....that Rishi ?
Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”

Let’s count the months, shall we?

Offline Tina53

Re: Is Boris’s Lax Leadership Putting Us All in Danger ?
« Reply #82 on: March 21, 2020, 12:29:15 PM »
From elsewhere.

Despite the sudden announcement of 10 deaths in 24 hours in England, there's no information about the number of cases in the UK.

This site will tell you how many cases, how many deaths, how many recoveries etc., worldwide and by country. https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

If you look at the country stats, the UK is actually doing much better than some countries on complete lockdown and so is the USA.  I wouldn't panic.

It's amazing that they don't shut the whole world down in a bad year of flu which kills around 650,000 and in a good year around 250,000 don't you think?

Offline Venturi Swirl

Re: Is Boris’s Lax Leadership Putting Us All in Danger ?
« Reply #83 on: March 21, 2020, 05:14:37 PM »
The hedge fund speculator who helped bring about the 2008 recession....that Rishi ?
He must only have been 12 then!  Rishi, the one whose actions even Trade Union leaders are praising. 

https://unitetheunion.org/news-events/news/2020/march/chancellors-measures-historic-bold-and-very-much-necessary-mccluskey/
"Surely the fact that their accounts were different reinforces their veracity rather than diminishes it? If they had colluded in protecting ........ surely all of their accounts would be the same?" - Faithlilly

Offline faithlilly

« Last Edit: March 21, 2020, 07:39:48 PM by Faithlilly »
Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”

Let’s count the months, shall we?

Offline Venturi Swirl

Re: Is Boris’s Lax Leadership Putting Us All in Danger ?
« Reply #85 on: March 21, 2020, 07:49:07 PM »
Sunak is 39... that would make him 27 in 2008.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/new-chancellor-rishi-sunak-cashed-in-on-fund-that-helped-break-banks-rb7zgfqkz
It was a joke dear.

 Thanks for posting the link, he has risen even further in my estimation having helped raise £900m for  the Children’s Investment Fund Foundation charity.  And he makes Keir Starmer look like Shrek.   8**8:/:
"Surely the fact that their accounts were different reinforces their veracity rather than diminishes it? If they had colluded in protecting ........ surely all of their accounts would be the same?" - Faithlilly

Offline faithlilly

Re: Is Boris’s Lax Leadership Putting Us All in Danger ?
« Reply #86 on: March 21, 2020, 08:32:33 PM »
It was a joke dear.

 Thanks for posting the link, he has risen even further in my estimation having helped raise £900m for  the Children’s Investment Fund Foundation charity.  And he makes Keir Starmer look like Shrek.   8**8:/:

It was a joke ? Really ? Isn’t a joke supposed to be funny ?

Helped crash the economy....which necessitated ( allegedly) austerity which plunged one in four children into poverty.

As to your last comment...I prefer the Paul Begala quote “Politics is just show business for ugly people.”
Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”

Let’s count the months, shall we?

Offline Venturi Swirl

Re: Is Boris’s Lax Leadership Putting Us All in Danger ?
« Reply #87 on: March 21, 2020, 09:29:05 PM »
It was a joke ? Really ? Isn’t a joke supposed to be funny ?

Helped crash the economy....which necessitated ( allegedly) austerity which plunged one in four children into poverty.

As to your last comment...I prefer the Paul Begala quote “Politics is just show business for ugly people.”
I wouldn’t expect you to have a sense of humour so don’t worry about it, most strident lefties don’t.  Rishi Sunak’s economic package is being praised by those on both sides of the political spectrum, shame you’re too churlish to recognise what an incredible bailout this is, and to give credit where it’s due, but then would require a degree of maturity which it seems you just don’t possess.. 
"Surely the fact that their accounts were different reinforces their veracity rather than diminishes it? If they had colluded in protecting ........ surely all of their accounts would be the same?" - Faithlilly

Offline faithlilly

Re: Is Boris’s Lax Leadership Putting Us All in Danger ?
« Reply #88 on: March 21, 2020, 09:57:13 PM »
I wouldn’t expect you to have a sense of humour so don’t worry about it, most strident lefties don’t.  Rishi Sunak’s economic package is being praised by those on both sides of the political spectrum, shame you’re too churlish to recognise what an incredible bailout this is, and to give credit where it’s due, but then would require a degree of maturity which it seems you just don’t possess..

And you berated me for ad homs...ssshhhh you really are the worst kind of hypocrite.

Most commentators agree that while the chancellor’s economic package is welcome it does not go far enough.....the self-employed, as you yourself pointed out, are going to lose out.
Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”

Let’s count the months, shall we?

Offline Venturi Swirl

Re: Is Boris’s Lax Leadership Putting Us All in Danger ?
« Reply #89 on: March 21, 2020, 10:46:31 PM »
And you berated me for ad homs...ssshhhh you really are the worst kind of hypocrite.

Most commentators agree that while the chancellor’s economic package is welcome it does not go far enough.....the self-employed, as you yourself pointed out, are going to lose out.
If you insult me then expect to be insulted back.  Treat me with respect and I will treat you with respect.  I think that’s only fair.  I am self-employed.  I hope more will be done for me and I believe that it will but if it isn’t then I will have to find ways to help myself.  The government cannot guarantee the financial solvency of every single citizen.  Despite your nasty earlier accusation that “I’m Alright Jack”, the truth is I’m quite the opposite, you’re just so intent on slagging me off you can’t see it. 
"Surely the fact that their accounts were different reinforces their veracity rather than diminishes it? If they had colluded in protecting ........ surely all of their accounts would be the same?" - Faithlilly